Thanks guys! It was a purely accidental. I overexposed the background by accident and I didn't wanna delete it so I increased the blacks in PP to create a silhouette effect. I like how it turned out
Originally Posted by Geoff Chandler
This is a great value and much under estimated lens.
Of course - needs someone with an eye and some know how to get reults like those!!
Great photos!
Geoff, I thought the same thing. I was debating whether I get this or the 70-300 VR without the macro. Although the VR will help for hand held shots slower than 1/80, I wanted a macro lens at the same time. So far the tests came out better than I expected. I have a few more days to play around with it and if I don't think it meets my needs, I'll return it in the store and try out the 105mm f.28 macro.
Thanks guys! It was a purely accidental. I overexposed the background by accident and I didn't wanna delete it so I increased the blacks in PP to create a silhouette effect. I like how it turned out
Geoff, I thought the same thing. I was debating whether I get this or the 70-300 VR without the macro. Although the VR will help for hand held shots slower than 1/80, I wanted a macro lens at the same time. So far the tests came out better than I expected. I have a few more days to play around with it and if I don't think it meets my needs, I'll return it in the store and try out the 105mm f.28 macro.
-500mL
Interesting. Well - if it's macro you want then the 105mm f.28 macro is going
to be quite a bit better. IMHO the 70 - 300 is a decent quality zoom with
semi macro ability to boot. On the whole, though I don't use it much, I am very happy with mine - but one day I will buy a dedicated macro - My 17 - 70goes stupidly close - you can actually touch the subject! so it casts a shadow - that too takes great semi macro shots, but I'd still like a dedicated macro one day.
So - if the 70 - 300's macro ability suits you - then the usefull zoom range and reasonable quality make it a great buy.
Hey Domenic,
She will appreciate the soft focus on the baby. Typically you see more with the womans face to capture that love and adoring kind of look. Sometimes the get it out look, depends on the woman and how far along . Try and use a background and pose to accent the baby more, perhaps a little more sideways. Plain backgrounds tend to work best. And don't be affraid to use the flash, looks slightly underexposed.
Interesting. Well - if it's macro you want then the 105mm f.28 macro is going
to be quite a bit better. IMHO the 70 - 300 is a decent quality zoom with
semi macro ability to boot. On the whole, though I don't use it much, I am very happy with mine - but one day I will buy a dedicated macro - My 17 - 70goes stupidly close - you can actually touch the subject! so it casts a shadow - that too takes great semi macro shots, but I'd still like a dedicated macro one day.
So - if the 70 - 300's macro ability suits you - then the usefull zoom range and reasonable quality make it a great buy.
Geoff,
How close to the subject do you have to be to get the macro shots in focus? I took those shots about 5 feet away from it. I am looking into the 105mm f2.8 as well, but it will not be for a while since I'm thinking of getting the VR Micro (means more $$).
IMHO the 70 - 300 is a decent quality zoom with semi macro ability to boot. On the whole, though I don't use it much, I am very happy with mine -
I thought much the same thing but I was never 100% comfortable with the Sigma 70-300 so it's sitting in box box unused somewhere in the house and has been for over 18 months. The IQ of my 55-200 puts my Sigma to shame any day.
Just a shot at the zoo.
Attempted to completely recover it in post- warmed, darkened, cropped etc.
D800, D300, D90, 24-70 f2.8, 70-200VR f2.8, 300 F4, 105 micro, 16-85VR, 50mm 1.8, Tammy 90 macro, 70-300VR, SB900, 2xSB600, MB-D10, 055XPROB 322RC2. New computers to run photoshop faster. C&C always appreciated. PhotoGallery
Pressing the shutter is the start of the process - Joe McNally ... Buying the body is the start of the process - Dread Pirate
Geoff,
How close to the subject do you have to be to get the macro shots in focus? I took those shots about 5 feet away from it. I am looking into the 105mm f2.8 as well, but it will not be for a while since I'm thinking of getting the VR Micro (means more $$).
I haven't used it for over 6 months - but as I remember it is around 20 inches.
I tend to use the 17 - 70 for close ups - despite the risk of shadows - and most zoom work I use my 28 - 200 which is a more usefull range for me - the 70 - 300 is nearly retired - Ireckon I need something going up to 400 or more in it's place - then a dedicated Macro - the Sigma 105 seems OK as I know a couple of people with one.
Originally Posted by Turo
Reply With Quote
. Try and use a background and pose to accent the baby more, perhaps a little more sideways. Plain backgrounds tend to work best. And don't be affraid to use the flash, looks slightly underexposed.
